Is repititive imprinting of ideas a primary cult tactic?

by hubert 144 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • sweetscholar

    that are not even put out by witnesses understand the need to inculcate and emphasise points with repetition and REMINDERS throughout a speech or in general. human memory is el stinko. and Paul said to CONTINUE in the things learned by us. people who don't like what's being said or repeated will pick at those things and moan and belly-ache. and again, look in the mirror. you're a silly nutjob who lives in mud. with a face of a lizard. doofis doofis doofis. where's your credibility ??? I rest my case.

  • doofdaddy

    I apologise Sweet Scholar.

    I truly hope you find peace

  • sweetscholar

    well you're a relativist who believes in situation ethics and lame-brain whatever feels good or right to the person is ok philophies. no logic in any of that. Absolute Truth or Divine Truth or Biblical Truth don't exist to you. that's why you object to "pagan demented world" terms and language. I know you don't believe that Noah's Flood actually happened, or the Ark and stuff like. but just for variety's sake, for the sake of argument, let's just say that that did in fact happen JUST the way the Bible says that it did. ok? with me so far. well this is a question I've posed to people, and their responses betrway the general Biblical ignorance or lack of common sense or logic that people in general have in the world. it's a simple question that a 4th grader could theoretically answer, if he's minus retarded baggage and silliness in his brain. it's this: IF Noah's Ark was actually true, then what was the only true religion at that time in history? what PROVED to be the ONLY TRUE RELIGION on this earth, again IF God flooded and destroyed the world, the people who did not listen to Noah and his family, and take part in that "strange work" (compare Isaiah 28:21) of building the Ark and "preaching righteousness" at that time? what HAD to be "the only true church and only true religion" at the time? ok? well these are the asinine responses that people have, if they respond at all: "aaahhhh, duhhh, ahh the Jews?" "aaaahh, the ten commandments" "ahh, eeehh, Israel?" and I patiently and lovingly and gently tell them "well no, think about it. The Jews did not exist yet at this time. this happened BEFORE the Jews were around." analyze it, this is the problem people have. people think that "religion" or "true religion" or "true church" has to be this elaborate formal alter and steeple thing all the time. but that's NOT what is ULTIMATELY. the logical and Biblical answer to my very simple question is: THE ONLY TRUE RELIGION AND TRUE CHURCH AT THAT TIME IN HISTORY PROVED TO 'NOAH'S ARK'. in other words, Noahs' Family, "the Church of Noah" under Jehovah's command, preaching His Warning and Word, and the constructing of the Ark, before the Flood Waters were unleashed. duhhhhhhh. that's what proved to be (if the Bible's account is true and historically accurate) the ONLY true religon, hence THE TRUTH. the Truth. ultimate religious, spiritual, divine, Truth. you have a hang-up and uptight thing about capatilizing the letter "T" in "Truth"??? only shows that you're a relativist who thinks that all religions and philosophies are ok, it's just personal choice. well look at the miserable horrendous state of the world, cuz people do what "feels right". Noah was an arrogant cultic "exclusivist" if that's the case. and so is Christ Jesus. cuz HE (not JWs) called the Road to Life a NARROW ROAD WHERE ONLY A FEW WOULD BE ON. a few, buddy. NOT the majority of people in the world. and not even the majority of professing so-called "Christians". The Bible is extremely "exclusivist" in a certain sense. cuz it makes clear distinctions between "righteous people" and "unrighteous people" and an unrighteous person does not necessarily have to steal or kill to qualify. just worshipping dragons or cows is enough to qualify as "unrighteous" and "false" in the Bible's eyes and God's eyes. WAKE UP. your beef is not so much with Jehovah's witnesses as it is with Jehovah Himself. and His Bible. and don't give me this lame "poor man's argument" (as it's called in logic) of "your interpretation" cuz there's true and false interpretations or "understandings" of things. but either Noah's Ark and the Flood and Sodom and Gommorah happened or they didn't. either it's a narrow road or it isn't. people (screwed up sons and daughters of Adam) generally do and believe what they WANT to do and believe, not usually what the honest genuine cold rude facts actually indicate or support. later.

  • sweetscholar

    something I wanted to add, that I forgot to actually say in my other long email message to you. which I hope you red first. as far as the Noah's Ark thing, my point was that the only true religion at whatever time in history, according to the Bible, is DOING WHATEVER GOD WANTS YOU TO DO IN WHATEVER WAY HE WANTS YOU TO DO IT, AND WHATEVER TIME HE WANTS YOU TO DO IT IN. so sometimes that may involve alters (later on with the Jews) or Lord's Supper or Baptist (with true Christians) or meetings and preaching or teaching, and abstaining from so and so. it's doing God's revealed Will, at whatever point in history. so then Noah's Ark, if the story in the Bible is true and literal and accurate, turned out to be the ONLY TRUE religion on the planet. in other words, the Truth. though you rave in protest at the thought of "Truth" in that sense.

  • Satanus


    Boy, you really stomped the doofdaddy into the mud. You must be a real jesus power ranger, an arch angel among fairies, a lion amidst dogs, a prohpet surrounded by slobbering idiots.


    Noah's archianism. Cool. Gotta look up that religion somewhere. Can you tell more about that religion? The core doctrines?

    S dragon worshipper

    Ps, were there any dragons in noah's arch?

  • TD


    Just for fun, let's assume the story is real:

    the logical and Biblical answer to my very simple question is: THE ONLY TRUE RELIGION AND TRUE CHURCH AT THAT TIME IN HISTORY PROVED TO 'NOAH'S ARK'. in other words, Noahs' Family, "the Church of Noah" under Jehovah's command, preaching His Warning and Word, and the constructing of the Ark, before the Flood Waters were unleashed.

    Where in the Bible does it state that any conditions were attached to admittance on to the ark?

    • Was it necessary to be adopted into Noah's family?
    • Was it necessary to help Noah and his family build the Ark?
    • Was it necessary to help Noah and his family gather food?
    • Was it necessary to help Noah and his family take care of the animals?
    • Was it necessary to help Noah preach his warning to the wicked world?
    • Was it necessary to believe the same things that Noah did?

    If you think the answer to any of these questions is, "Yes," then please cite the scripture.

  • sweetscholar

    I don't know why it's so hard to grasp. and of course you don't really believe (or at least have serious doubts regarding) the Noah's Ark account in the Bible. but what's the difficulty really? they had to do WHATEVER NOAH AND HIS FAMILY WERE DOING AT THE TIME. whatever that was. well what did they do? construct the ark, abstain from what God said were no no's, and "preaching righteousness." The Verses of Scripture are whatever is indicative of what provided salvation from the Flood. common logical sense. whatever Noah and his family did, that's what other people should have done, to be spared God's Judgment and Wrath. can we get a nice hardy "DDUUUHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH". sorry. couldn't resist. I'm only human. not perfect. but your nonsense kinda warranted it. your foolish questions and silliness don't make sense. you're asking (nay demanding) for specific Verse Citations to show whether "yes" to any of your listed criteria are to be expressly plainly there in the sense of "you must do this, this, this and that to be spared God's Flood and Judgment, with Noah's Ark, and so and so". come on. the Verses (and reasoning powers that God gave you) indicate that WHATEVER NOAH DID THAT'S WHAT OTHERS HAD TO DO ALSO, TO BE SAVED IN THE ARK OF SALVATION. and again, the original point is that God does NOT tolerate quite as much as you think. God had only ONE true religion throughout history. Enoch, Noah, Moses, Jesus. that sort of thing. yes God is not as restrictive and dogmatic as some characters make him out either, so there's a balance. but overall, it's a narrow road, and NOT a "do whatever feels right in your heart" thing. if Noah's Ark was true (and there IS tons of archeological and historical evidence to show that Global Flood did happen thousands of years ago) and if God is real, and the Bible is true, then obviously logically the only true religion or "church" at that specific time in history was Noah's Ark. what's the big difficulty in grasping that??? it's doing whatever God wants at whatever time in history. and at that time that was it. constructing the Ark, staying clean, and preaching God's Word of "righteousness" to the world. and Rutherford's take on this that or the other at the Resurrection doesn't negate any of that. refining of dross and error advancing light in the "last days" is what it is. the point is that pagan corrupt blood-guilty and blood-stained idolatrous Roman Catholic Church does NOT have the "Truth". and neither do the silly Buddhists who worship a dead man named "Buddha" and don't believe in a Creator. not all religions or philosophies can logically be right or true if they all conflict with each other. can we can get another "duhhhh". you can't have two sets of CONFLICTING 'truths'. such a notion (held by certain people today) makes NO sense. either there is a purgatory or there isn't. and don't give me this gas about "oh it exists for some people and not for others. it's a personal individual thing. you can't judge." the Romanist Church does not say that purgatory only exists for Catholics, but exists IN GENERAL. and the Protestant churches say "no there is no such place for anybody." well??? which is true? can't both be right. that's just one of MANY MANY MANY examples of what I mean. either Mohammad was a true prophet of God or he was a gross demonized imposter. and don't say "well he's a prophet to Muslims, even if he's not for you." Cuz that's not the real position. the position in the Koran is that he is a prophet, period. and the Bible says that Christ was the last of "Jehovah's Prophets". and that anyone adding to that, or the Bible, is cursed and "anathema" and not of God. a false spirit and false gospel. false prophet. well? which notion is true? Babylon is confusion. wake up. narrow road of life and light. true light. "AND FEW ARE THE ONES FINDING IT." of course with human nature from Adam being so horrendous and rebellious and warped and fallen and stubborn and silly. and with the Devil running around deceiving people. no wonder the world's a mess. a nice result of people doing "what feels right to them." anymore asinine questions? (by the way, I like your cowboy hat. I have several myself.) peace.

  • seattleniceguy

    Welcome to the board! A couple suggestions:
    - Use paragraphs. They will make your posts MUCH easier to read. If you're not posting in Internet Explorer, you probably need to check the "Automatic Cr/Lf" box above the post button.
    - You might enjoy the discussion if you stop insulting people who disagree with you and try to understand their position. TD in particular made some really good points that directly pertain to your previous posts.

  • cyberdyne systems 101
    cyberdyne systems 101

    One thing I never understood was if the Flood and Noah happened then how did the animals get to all the continents?

    Also your point about it being few that find the the true faith/religeon/church, is that either there are those that will never find it (never hear about it/ blinded by satan etc) - which sounds a tad unfair to me - or those that will as you claim the witnesses have (and thereby you have), and if you feel it is a narrow road few will find then why do you come here with your poor attitude (yes I know...your not perfect) when you expect many to not want this 'Truth' ? Are you here to just gloat and say we're all doomed to die? Or should you not be showing a Christ like persona and be someone that attracts the meek at heart? Trying in a kindly way to show us your truth? The fact is your breaking your own rules by being here, and you display an attitude which is most unchrist like.

  • sweetscholar

    yes, I admit that at times there could be gentler tones, but there's a balance. you don't seem to read the Bible much either. I'm not addressing people I just met on the street, but generally speaking APOSTATE JUDAS-LIKE AND PHARISAICAL HERETICAL SNAKES !!! or at the very least people who are in that camp for the most part. listen very well to this. you talk about Christ-like??? do you read where Jesus called them 'sons of vipers' and 'hypocrites' and 'sons of Satan' and 'white-washed graves that appear nice outwardly but inside are full dead men's bones and all corruption'??????? Paul called them Cretans and "False Apostles" and "ministers of Satan." a balance. yes "seasoned with salt." and if you knew me and were with me all the time, you'd see that (though imperfect) I don't speak to average people on the street or in their homes the same exact way I'm going off here. in fact, I won't be on this site that much longer. it's just mostly warning messages. but you know something, I could actually be WORSE !!!! there are people who are like 10 times more blunt and rude than I am on this. I'm being more matter-of-fact and straight-forward than anything else. so don't be so thin-skinned. it's not all about panty-waist sissified whimpish stuff. it's cutting hard and bold. but understand this. if I saw ANY of you hurt on the street, unlike many Greek Orthodox demonized priests who spit and throw rocks, I would help you and comfort you and make sure you're well, and pay for your treatment. I don't wish anything bad on anyone, but that all repent of their rebellious whining and Korah-like silliness (Jude; Numbers) and stubborn pagan corrupt worldly vain junk. but your point is taken. I'll try to be a bit gentler. but understand the actual points, instead of harping on "tones" that you may not like or that you may be too sensitive to. but I appreciate your comments anyway.

Share this